Sunday 6 August 2006 04.42 EDT
First published on Sunday 6 August 2006 04.42 EDT

Callers to a government helpline that forms one of the major planks of the legal aid scheme are being left in limbo, according to new research.

A panel of experts has road-tested CLS Direct (Community Legal Service Direct) - which provides advice on benefits, tax credits, housing, employment, education and debt problems - in a 'mystery shopper' exercise for the latest issue of Independent Lawyer magazine.

'In principle, CLS Direct should be a good vehicle for building support for legal aid,' said Roger Smith, director of the human rights group Justice, who took part in the exercise. But he is concerned that advisers seem reluctant to refer callers on for face-to-face help: 'On this snapshot, the advice seems somewhat variable. A potential weakness was always likely to be appropriate "referral after" advice. If this scheme works, some callers will be satisfied by their call, but others should be encouraged to take matters further. The Legal Services Commission (LSC) has to make sure that CLS Direct isn't just a mechanism for deterring demand.'

Out of 10 calls made, six prompted detailed responses and, in four of those cases, experts detected further advice was needed; in two cases, callers were prevented from taking appropriate legal action (see panel below). Over the last 12 months, 73,500 problems were dealt with by the helpline, and more than one-third of those calls (29,508) related to debt. Callers receive 30 minutes of free advice and more if they are judged eligible under a means test - all employment advice is means-tested.

The service reported impressive customer satisfaction ratings this month, with 93 per cent of callers happy with the service. 'The people using CLS Direct are clearly getting the help they need,' said Vera Baird QC, a minister at the Department of Constitutional Affairs.

But Richard Miller, director of the Legal Aid Practitioners' Group, points out: 'The person receiving it may have high levels of satisfaction without realising they've been given poor advice.' He called for continuous assessments to make sure quality standards are being maintained. 'At the moment, that doesn't seem to be happening,' Miller added.

CLS Direct is set to expand considerably over the next three years as telephone advice is increasingly seen as a cost-effective way of providing access to justice. The LSC expects to increase spending on the service from £15m to £25m next year and £28m in 2008.

'The big question is whether advisers are being encouraged, when they're giving advice, not to refer cases on,' said Russell Conway, a member of the Law Society's access to justice committee, who also took part in the test. 'The commission claims to have a referral rate of 13 per cent - that's bizarre and worrying. There are only so many issues that can be resolved over the phone. If consumers are being put off taking proper legal steps, it does more harm than good.'

Conway evaluated advice provided by CLS Direct in relation to a tenant whose flat on the Woodberry Down estate in Hackney, east London, was infested by ants. 'This was an actual case of mine and we settled for £5,000,' he said. No legal remedy was suggested by the adviser. Conway described the advice given as 'simply wrong'.

There were other concerns that the service was being used inappropriately. For example, Lambeth County Court is routinely sending envelopes containing legal forms to tenants who run the risk of losing their homes in possession cases, referring them on to CLS Direct. Housing experts at south London firm Pierce Glynn complained to the LSC, citing two cases where tenants, both of them single parents, faced losing their homes after being given advice that failed to appreciate the severity of the callers' situations. 'It isn't possible to give issue-specific advice to tenants without reviewing paperwork,' argued Pierce Glynn partner Steven Pierce. 'OK, you can give accurate general advice, but you can't determine whether or not somebody has a defence by talking on a phone.'

John Sirodcar, head of direct services at the LSC, denied that advisers were reluctant to refer clients on to face-to-face services where appropriate. He also said that he had not received any client details. 'Give me the evidence and I will check it out,' he added.

Jon Robins is a regulator contributor to 'Cash' and the editor of 'Independent Lawyer'.

· For more information on CLS Direct, visit clsdirect.org.uk or call 0845 3454345.

The good, the bad and the 'simply wrong': How the helpline performs

1 My 15-year-old Muslim daughter was banned from wearing her headscarf at school. Can they do this?'

The caller was told to see her headteacher and was advised on the case of Shabina Begum, the schoolgirl refused permission to wear her jilbab. ('I'm sorry I'm going to be a bit technical - the ruling was obiter dictum rather than the ratio meaning that it was a passing remark ...').

'I would've given 10/10, but he loses a mark for the Latin,' commented Roger Smith, director of Justice. 9/10

2 I live in a flat which for six years has been infested with ants. The council didn't do anything at first and, when they did, used the wrong poison. Help!'

The caller was advised to make 'an official complaint', and to contact the local government ombudsman.

'Simply wrong,' said Russell Conway of the Law Society. 'There seems to be an indication of the adviser being briefed not to refer cases to a solicitor. We settled this case for £5,000.' 2/10

3 'I've lived with my partner for eight years. We aren't married, and our house is in my partner's name. It's worth £280,000 with a £230,000 mortgage. I pay the bills, but my partner pays the mortgage. We're splitting up.'

CLS Direct advises the caller that they have a beneficial interest in the property, as opposed to a legal interest.

'The basic advice appears to be there,' comments Gwendolen Gwynn Morgan, a solicitor at Fisher Meredith. 'The adviser could have given the caller some direction in locating a suitable firm.' 5/10

4 'I'm a 30-year-old woman living in a rented flat. I left because I was being beaten up by my boyfriend. The violence has been going on for months. I have a history of depression and self-harm. I've been sleeping on a friend's floor in a bedsit. She wants me out.'

The call was made late in the day before a bank holiday. The adviser identified useful contacts with the local authority and Shelter.

'Time was of the essence. The adviser did very well,' noted Marlan Higgins, a housing law expert at Turpin Miller Higgins. 7/10

5 'I was offered a job but due to a poor reference from my old employer, it was withdrawn. When I got the offer I resigned and now have no job.'

The caller was told there wasn't much to be done. 'They can give a negligent reference, provided it is honest and accurate.'

'Employers have a duty to give a fair and accurate reference. If the reference does not conform to this, the reference is negligent. He explains this in a misleading and inaccurate way,' said Gwynn Morgan. 'The adviser should have suggested that the client see a solicitor.' 2/10

6 'My flat was bought by a property company a few years ago. They've given me two months' notice but I've lived here for 10 years. Do I have to go?'

The adviser established whether there was an 'S20 notice' and advised that, if there was, it was an 'assured shorthold tenancy' and probably no defence could be argued.

'Not bad,' said Bob Nightingale, director of the South West London Law Centres. 'The adviser spotted the main booby trap. I was disappointed she didn't advise the client to take the papers to a housing lawyer.' 8/10